State and secularism in Bangladesh

© © 2010 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd. All rights reserved. With a Muslim population of 130 million, Bangladesh is the third largest Muslimmajority country and has the fourth largest Muslim population in the world; yet, it has retained a fairly tolerant and secular character for most of her history. Although there have been occasional drifts towards religious extremism, the secular character has never been threatened seriously. The newly independent Bangladesh in 1971 incorporated secularism as one of the four principles on which the constitution of Bangladesh was based. When Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founding leader of Bangladesh, and his regime were removed in a military coup in 1975 (less than four years after the country’s independence), the new military government of General Zia which took control after months of instability removed both the principles of socialism and secularism from the constitution. The military government in Bangladesh sought to introduce not only a neo-liberal economic policy, but also introduced Islam into the body politic, thus shaping the political process. The military regime brought religion to the national politics to win the support of the religious right. Bangladesh politics continues to be embroiled over the secularism/religion divide. What role does the modern state play in resolving the apparent conflict between religious and secular ideologies, especially when the state itself has been de-secularized? Does broader socio-economic progress limit or enable the state’s role as an adjudicator? This chapter will explore both the complex processes of global and local/national politics in exploring this transformation and continued tension

Modern Law, Traditional “Shalish” and Civil Society Activism in Bangladesh

This chapter examines problems of legal pluralism in Bangladesh by focusing on shalish, the informal dispute resolution and mediation often involving women and their various alleged transgressions of moral conduct. It deals with the efforts of civil society organizations in Bangladesh in general, with specific focus on the Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK), a legal aid organization and an important member of the civil society organizations in Bangladesh, to flesh out confrontations between formal law and informal law, rationalization of public life, and the interface between state and civil society and between civil society and traditional rural society. This chapter also explores whether shalish, as an alternative dispute resolution, has a place in the judicial system of Bangladesh. The chapter deals with the challenges and promises of effective implementation of alternative dispute resolution, and problems of indigenization of the adjudication process in conformity with the ideals of a modern judicial system, i.e., neutrality, fairness and equality

Glocalization

© Oxford University Press 2019. All rights reserved. This chapter provides a conceptual overview of glocalization, tracing its origin, and the intellectual milieu in which this concept evolved. It also examines how glocalization helps researchers understand the interpenetration of “global” with “local” in various institutions and everyday life. In explaining the relationship between the processes of globalization with glocalization, this chapter highlights the potential usefulness of this concept in global studies. It also introduces a distinction between a thin theory and a thick theory of globalization, arguing that glocalization is conceptually closer to the latter. The chapter posits that in order to understand the dynamics of the current phase of globalization, a top-down view of globalization may not be adequate, and that one also has to recognize the growing transglocal linkages portending the emergence of transglocalization, a new phase of globalization that may even contest the hegemony of the top-down, neoliberal globalization

State and COVID-19 Response in the Asian Tiger Economies Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore

By comparing the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Tiger economies, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore, this article examines the advantages and limitations of the statist command and control approaches to crisis management. Local, regional, and global politics as well as global political economy impinge and influence the state response. The article argues that a combination of factors - the institutional memory, overall state capacity and efficacy rooted in the preexisting institutional nexus, performance legitimacy, trust, reliance on scientific rationality, and integration with global scientific networks - stood in good stead in dealing with the crisis. Yet, as the crisis rolled on, some of the stellar performers showed considerable gaps in planning and politics trumped sensible policies. Despite the commonality, the article shows that there were important differences in the responses of the three Tiger economies, especially in rolling out the vaccines, which can be explained not only by the state capacity but also the larger global politico-economic contexts. The article argues that the state capacity is affected by the global dynamics, the specificity of geopolitical and historical contexts, which must be factored in in explaining successes and failures of state responses